The present consolidated evaluation report on the Multinational Basic Education
Project was drafted by Dr. Eduardo Ortiz (Colombia) and Dr. Keva Bethel (Bahamas),
who were contracted by the General Secretariat to conduct an external on-site
evaluation of the Multinational Projects in the participating countries. This
paper is a summary of the reports submitted by the evaluators based on the trips
they made to the countries involved. The report was drafted by the outside consultants
at a meeting held at OAS headquarters in Washington D.C., in October 1995. In
addition to the assistance rendered by the Department of Educational Affairs
(DAE), the external evaluators had access to the background data and documentation
available from the country reports, pursuant to the evaluation guidelines approved
in due course.

No provision was made to cover all the countries participating in the project
owing to budgetary reasons and the time constraints on the consultants.

To date, the following country reports have been received: Bolivia, Brazil,
Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis,
Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela.
II. Background and Scope

The multinational projects of the OAS were created by the Inter-American Council
for Education, Science and Culture (CIECC) based on the Evaluation of
the Resolution of Maracay (CIECC/RES. 736/87), which divided the regional
education programs into three areas: Basic Education, Education for Work, and
Secondary and Higher Education.

Resolution CIECC/RES. 770/88 defined 12 priority regional areas in education,
science and culture in order to promote integration, multinationality, and horizontal
cooperation. The resolution adopted goals, fields of work and emphasized cooperative
regional programming beginning in 1990, with a view to attaining comprehensive
development.

Resolution CIECC/RES. 771/88 called upon CIECC to focus on its policy- making
functions in the area, based on a diagnosis of conditions in the region and
on a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of the regional programs. In the
new programming system (1990-1995), the following aspects were emphasized: the
gathering of financial resources; cooperative action of a multinational nature;
horizontal cooperation; and the ability to find and promote real solutions to
the problems given priority by the countries of the region.

The evaluation missions were conducted in August and September 1995. The overall
framework of the evaluation called for adherence to the general purposes of
the evaluation process defined by the Organization of American States (OAS)
working through the Inter-American Committee on Education (CIE), as follows:

1. To comply with the mandates and guidelines of CIECC on the evaluation of
multinational projects.

2. To foster an understanding, comprehensive analysis and overall view of project
activities, as well as the major results and impact derived therefrom, both
at the country-institutional and multinational level of the Regional Educational
Development Program (PREDE).

3. To make recommendations to the decision-making bodies of the OAS and the
member States, including those in charge of the project executing agencies,
on the course and future direction of the cooperative activities in 1996 and
thereafter.

The methodology used in the evaluation was made up of three basic components:
1) the retrieval, processing and analysis of data, reports and documents; 2)
interviews and surveys covering a broad range of people having a bearing on
the projects in the area of basic education; and 3) field trips.

1. The quantity and variety of lines of work covered by PRODEBAS, which made
comparability difficult.

2. The considerable difficulties posed by coordination, as well as technical
and financial problems that stood in the way of start-up of SIEBAS.

3. The impediments to implementing an educational data processing system.

4. Changes in government, administration and coordinators, which had an adverse
impact on the project in several countries (Bolivia, El Salvador, Nicaragua,
Panama, Venezuela).

5. Country failure to faithfully adhere to the General Secretariats indications
in the preparation of reports, and the application of evaluation guidelines.

6. Interruptions or delays caused by irregularities in the payment of country
quotas or by the slowness of bureaucratic procedures.

7. A poor theoretical approach to the work (humanistic constructivism in Panama
and Nicaragua).

8. A certain lack of follow-up, both nationally and internationally, despite
the efforts of the General Secretariat in Washington, D.C., and the local OAS
offices.

9. The limited ability of the countries to come up with a multinational approach
or horizontal cooperation, both of which depended more on the work of Headquarters
than on country initiatives.
IV. Principal results

1. Comprehensive care of children six years of age and under, with some countries
successfully arranging for the coordination of centers operable at different
levels (national, regional and local) in order to attract the necessary support
from other institutions and the community (Bolivia, Chile, El Salvador).

7. Improvement in the quality of basic education for indigenous sectors (Chile).

8. Educational innovations for children and young people at high risk in marginal
urban areas (Colombia).

9. Expansion of four grades of rural post-primary education (Colombia).

10. Development of methodologies to support the work of multi-grade teachers
(Panama).

11. Training and development of basic education teachers, including a project
for a Masters Program in Basic Education (Chile).

12. Publication of The Latin American Review on Educational Innovations,one
of the major multinational achievements of the Latin American educational community
(Argentina).

In addition, the project took considerable steps to train, develop and upgrade
administrators, supervisors, teachers and officials in the education sector
of a number of countries.

Likewise, PRODEBAS provided momentum for or encouraged efforts far beyond its
own resource capabilities so that government-sponsored projects (Venezuela,
Argentina) or those sponsored by international organizations would continue
(PAMPALE/UNESCO project in Nicaragua).

The activities carried out under the project covered:

1. Research in early education.
2. Innovations in the classroom and in teacher training and development.
3. Preparation and publication of manuals, textbooks and other materials.
4. Efforts to set up an Educational Information System for Basic Education (SIEBAS).
5. Attendance at multinational coordination and programming meetings called
by the General Assembly. Also provided funding for courses and internships in
other countries.
V. Conclusions and Recommendations

1. The role of PRODEBAS should be highlighted both in terms of specific results
and as a process that has helped sustain the interest of educators in the quality
of education.

2. The appreciation for the work of PRODEBAS expressed by officials and educators
throughout the region proves that this project left quite a significant imprint
despite the discretion that apparently was typical of much of its performance.
Similar efforts in the future should assure that the mark of the sponsoring
institution is more clearly imprinted so that it will be given due credit as
a means of identifying the products and facilitating their later evaluation.

3. Among the reasons that account for the results of PRODEBAS and its impact
in the region despite its relatively modest funding (somewhat over US$1,700,000)
is the fact that it has been operating for six years in a number of countries,
thus stimulating and creating awareness, in addition to the systematic support
it has provided in key areas. In the opinion of officials from some countries,
the impact of the projects might possibly have been greater with more concentration.

4. Within the limited multinational thrust of the project, the key role played
by the General Secretariat in the area of coordination and the interaction brought
about by the programming meetings called by the General Secretariat should be
highlighted. In addition to the specific goals of such meetings, they succeeded
in bringing together the leaders of the project. More frequent meetings of a
specialized nature on matters of common interest (improvement in the relationships
between school/parents or community, teacher training strategies, etc.) would
have been desirable. The OAS should continue using a multinational coordinator
even after the project is over.

5. One of the lessons derived from the present evaluation concerns the desirability
of setting the evaluation guidelines from the start of the project. Closer follow-up
and evaluations during the life of the projects would also be desirable, drawing
on the support of the OAS local country offices. Consistent with this, certain
means of comparison should be determined at the start (childrens size
and weight standards). The control groups needed to guarantee the objectivity
of the evaluators.

6. The coordination effort made by institutions, communities and individuals
(Bolivia) made it possible to work out a new arrangement for operating schools.
This endeavor deserves to be supported and repeated. Duly oriented and supported,
such coordination poses considerable potential with respect to children in marginal
urban areas.

7. The formal adoption of PRODEBAS initiatives as part of official policies
and planning, the joint or coordinated work done by various administrative sectors,
and the increase in counterpart funding are additional indicators of the projects
success in various countries. Some type of follow-up beyond the life of PRODEBAS
should be attempted to ensure that the work is not left unfinished.

8. Some key activities may be in jeopardy once PRODEBAS ends because there is
still no assurance that they will be self-sustaining nor has their transfer
to competent authorities been sufficiently prepared. Provisions should be made
for resources to ease the transition to a totally self-sustaining effort.

9. Although SIEBAS could not be implemented, much work was done and many contacts
were made, which should not be underestimated. Rather, these efforts should
be salvaged and harmonized with the fresh possibilities offered by networks
moving in the same direction, such as the INTERNET and the Banco de Experiencias
Pedagógicas in Argentina (MCBA) and its REDUMATICA network.

10. Numerous publications and other materials edited as part of, or in conjunction
with, PRODEBAS are not adequately known in the various countries and could be
useful as support for national efforts and the avoidance of duplication. Subject
to review by the General Secretariat, an attempt should be made to publish and
circulate those materials most relevant to country interests in the various
areas.

11. After more than five years of publication, an evaluation should be conducted
of The Latin American Review on Educational Innovations, with the support
of its advisory council and interested institutions, to determine its projection
and line of action in the future.

12. Although its strategic goals and those having to with the quality of education
were reached, PRODEBAS has not had a major impact on the expansion of coverage.
In many cases, the countries themselves lack the resources needed to support
expansion. This is a topic that deserves special study. Member states should
be urged to get in touch with organizations able to provide financial support.
As stated in the report, appropriate presentation of the projects best
achievements might help attract the additional needed resources.

13. Studies should be undertaken, with the support of specialized consultants,
in such areas as:

Publications

The revival and start-up of SIEBAS and data processing in the schools

Expansion of coverage and its financing

14. In the countries where it was active, PRODEBAS has made a major contribution
to human resource development in education. This training capability might be
focused in the future on the development of new OAS priorities, which will require
human resource development and outreach efforts such as those made under PRODEBAS.
The best way to increase knowledge of issues such as environmental protection,
integration and non-discrimination is to introduce such topics in the basic
education curriculum. Here too, past experience and contacts made under PRODEBAS
may prove to be a valuable asset.